what difference would it make whether it was wounded or not? any wild steelhead has to be released regardless...are you saying misclips are hatchery only when they're hurt? or are you stating you don't normally retain steelhead? please clarify.

what difference would it make whether it was wounded or not? any wild steelhead has to be released regardless...are you saying misclips are hatchery only when they're hurt? or are you stating you don't normally retain steelhead? please clarify.

pretty lame some of you catch soo few you need to kill every one you catch regardless of the outcome.

Sorry, that you are so good at catching them that you have lost the rush, Jim. While I have only ever bonked a single steelhead in my 30+ years of steelheading on the fly (it was my first hatchery fish on the Vedder), I have never begrudged an angler for bonking a hatchery fish (that is why they are in the river). What exactly is the "outcome" you are referring to? That they are accidentally bonking a wild fish? Do you really think that the fish in Rod's photo is a deformed wild fish? Would that scar really look any different had the ladies actually clipped the whole fin off? It is most certainly a hatchery fish with a healed scar in place of a fin, it just has a remnant of the fin as well. You are free to release it if you want, but a hatchery fish is a hatchery fish, and you do not need to berate fellow anglers that bonk hatchery fish.

pretty lame some of you catch soo few you need to kill every one you catch regardless of the outcome.

pretty brave of Rodney to post that photo...

Sorry Jim, I had figured you must have been including Rodney (the original poster) and Nina (who decided to kill the allegedly mis-clipped fish) in with all the "lame" "pros" who have to kill every steelhead they catch regardless of the outcome. I guess you meant to insult all the subsequent posters but spare the original poster (who actually killed the mis-clipped fish). I apologize.

I have let go enough miss clips over the years..........because the law states "missing fin"

That is great, and good on you for releasing them, but in this case the fish was missing 80% of the fin and there was a healed scar in place of the 80% missing. The only way that fin is missing with a healed scar was if it was a mis-clip at the hatchery. What a CO is looking for is if the fish in your possession has a missing fin but the scar is not healed. This would indicate it was a wild fish that you just clipped the fin off with your nail clippers. They can see that the scar on that fin was healed so it was a mis-clip at the hatchery, not a mis-clip on the stream side. It is perfectly legal and ethical to kill a hatchery fish, which this fish was. Your choice to release it is grounded in your desire to not want to have to try and prove this fact to a judge if you are stopped by a CO looking for any excuse to write a ticket (and there are plenty of those out there). However, there is nothing wrong with keeping it, since it is clearly a hatchery fish.

I am sure glad they included a nice visual to help us identify what a clipped or keeper should look like.

I have asked for a clarification on what if any is a grey area ie: miss clipped fish's status re: the keeping of. My thought is that should I run into one of those Conservation Officers or RCMP or FO's that may go by the book or letter of the law, I'd hate to give them a reason to confiscate my gear and vehicle and or fine as per act.

there's plenty fish, why push the envelope on the interpretation or intent of the act, It's just not worth the risk.

Logged

finding your limits is fun, it can also be VERY painful.

If you care about Canada's future, get involved by holding your MLA's & MP's accountable!! don't just be sheep!!

it clearly says a "missing adipose"...not a partial adipose or deformed adipose.

it actually says healed scar in place of adipose...doesn't say complete missing adipose...misclip is a misclip... i've had a CO present when i retained a coho with a misclip...he confirmed for me before i bonked the fish....NO BS.

it clearly says a "missing adipose"...not a partial adipose or deformed adipose.

This is why I've never killed a miss clip........however after releasing the first one that I landed a few years ago, I was checked by a CO. I asked him about the fish which had about 50% of the adipose left with a healed scar. He informed me on how they clip them at the hatchery and that if a fish is missing any part of the adipose with a healed scar it is 100% hatchery.

So it seems that there may be some subjectivity regardless of what the regs state. The concern that I would have is the simple fact that you don't get to choose your CO! So try explaining that to the next CO you meet.....who has decided that you've just killed a wild fish......maybe the guy has a bit of a napoleon complex.....maybe he is not having the greatest day.....

I am not arguing that a miss clip fish is not a Hatchery fish, just that based on the letter of the law you could be screwed depending on the CO's interpretation.

Now realistically you will not have to worry about running into a CO on the Vedder